Thursday, July 26, 2018

There have been two recent animal studies in Spain indicating that beer is capable of removing aluminum from brain cells, allowing the brain to heal from its toxicity and inflammation. The most recent study used non-alcoholic beer, and the earlier one used beer with alcohol.

Both types of beer, mostly due to their antioxidant hops content and silica from silicic acid used in the brewing process, have been observed leaching aluminum from aluminum nitrate induced into lab rats.

Aluminum that gets into brain tissue creates all sorts of neurological ills.

Silica binds with aluminum to neutralize its toxicity and escort it out of the body through urine. Cucumbers and the herb horsetail are high in silica that doesn’t penetrate the blood-brain barrier. Beer contains the silicic acid which does.

But there is a serious caveat for using beer to eliminate aluminum from the brain that will be discussed in this article.

The Most Beer Recent Study

A new study was published in June 2018, in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology as Can nonalcoholic beer, silicon and hops reduce the brain damage and behavioral changes induced by aluminum nitrate in young male Wistar rats?

The purpose of the study was to determine if non-alcoholic (NA) beer could reduce aluminum toxicity in the brain, considered a precursor to Alzheimer’s and other neurodegenerative diseases, and which ingredients of NA beer were most effective.

Prior to the in vivo animal testing, hops, silicic acid, and non-alcoholic (NA) beer were tested for there ability in vitro (lab cultures) to ameliorate the effects of aluminum (Al) toxicity. In vitro testing showed hops, the flowers used in brewing beer, to have the highest antioxidant activity.

Beer has been considered a food high in silica as silicic acid, which is able to penetrate the blood-brain barrier. Further in vivo testing confirmed silicon’s (Si) ability at binding with aluminum to neutralize its toxicity and allowing it to be eliminated from brain cells in the urine.

Forty male Wistar rats were divided into five groups of eight. One group as control was not administered any reagent (compound to create chemical change). All four other groups were administered aluminum nitrate to induce aluminum toxicity. Three of the induced Al toxicity groups were fed either NA beer, hops extract, or silicic acid.

Many, but not all, beers are brewed with hops and/or barley. Some brewers use wheat also.

But silicic acid is used in all beer brewing processes to greater or lesser extents. So, each of the three groups were administered NA beer, silicic acid, and hops extract to determine the exact component efficacy of each in addition to NA beer. Summary from the study’s text:

… the current study demonstrates the ability of NABeer to counteract the neurodegenerative effects induced by aluminum nitrate as revealed by both in vitro and in vivo experiments. The in vitro ACh [acetylcholine – brain neurotransmitter] inhibition and the in vivo Nrf2 [“master regulator of antioxidant, detoxification and cell defense gene expression…”] pathway activation found invite discussion and demand more studies to better account for mechanisms that relate NABeer consumption with neurodegenerative protection. NABeer appears to be potentially valuable as a therapeutic tool with a role as a functional multi-target drink. [emphasis added] (Source.)

The earlier 2016 animal study, published in early 2017 in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, conducted by mostly the same research team, and with similar methods, had used alcoholic beer and received similar results. Here’s their abstract.

Modern Day Problems in Drinking Beer: Almost all Mass-produced Beers are Contaminated

While beer is a traditional, fermented drink that has been enjoyed by cultures all over the world for probably thousands of years, and is a healthy beverage when made traditionally, today’s modern-day beer drinkers face many challenges in finding healthy beer.

In a 2014 interview with Health Impact News, Dr. Don Huber discussed the practice of grain farmers in North America spraying the herbicide glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s RoundUp, on grain crops to kill them before harvest.

Barley, one of the main grains used to produce beer, was particularly troublesome according to Dr. Huber:

There are two reasons that a farmer wants to [use glyphosate on non-GMO crops]. It is for late season weed control in situations where he has patches of green weeds in the field that came up late. [This is commonly done with wheat and barley.] It is a little slower to harvest when weeds are present.

The other reason involves late season snow. In the northern region such as in the Dakotas, in certain parts of Montana, and in the Prairies of Canada, there is a very short growing season. If it snows on the crop at harvest then you may lose the crop, because you can’t get back into the field to do the harvest. In these regions, 70% of the wheat and barley are desiccated with glyphosate before harvest. [This kills the plant so that it will wilt and dry]. Farmers don’t want to take a risk in losing their entire wheat and barley crop, so they will take a cut in yield and quality by using glyphosate a few weeks before harvest, and then harvest the crop early.

Farmers don’t realize how much they are contaminating that food or feed product when they do this. They will accept the cut [in quality and quantity of the crop], because that can buy them a week advantage in harvest. It’s really more done for ease and planning. However, it is just the dumbest thing you could ever do from a health and safety standpoint.

In fact, beer brewers are having a problem with glyphosate. A few years ago, when one of my colleagues wanted to get more Abraxis test strips for testing materials for glyphosate residue, he was told that they had a 3 month backlog.

He asked, what was causing this? He was told that every load of malt barley coming out of North Dakota has to be tested, because the glyphosate levels were so high that it kills the yeast in the brew mix. (Source.)

For example, Germany is known for having some of the strictest standards in the world for producing high quality beers, but a 2016 report by a German environmental group found traces of glyphosate in Germany’s 14 most popular beers. (Source.)

Germany, of course, is home to what is now the largest producer of GM seeds, Bayer, which just bought out Monsanto.

Other than brewing your own beer from ingredients you know are not contaminated, it might be best to choose beers produced in countries that are banning GMOs, such as Mexico.

But given the world trade commerce of grains, and the U.S. dominance in the grain market, even buying beer from countries banning GMOs may not be safe.

Another potentially huge problem for beer drinkers on the horizon is the recent announcement that genetic engineers in California have genetically engineered brewers’ yeast that can make a beer-like substance without the use of hops. (Source.)

Using High Silica Mineral Water for Aluminum Brain Detox Instead of Beer

High silica mineral waters are able to transport silicic acid in ionic suspension through the brain barrier and into the brain.

A recent British study had 15 elderly dementia patients drinking a liter of bottled Spritzer mineral water, preferably consumed within an hour, daily for 13 weeks. Blood levels were reduced 50 to 70 percent among all the subjects.

Three of them showed considerable improvement and the others demonstrated slight improvement or no further deterioration. (Source.)

Spritzer contains 35 mg of silicic acid per liter. Volvic bottled water has only 20 mg, and Fiji bottled water leads the way with 45 mg per liter. All of these milligram amounts per liter translate to parts per million (ppm). It’s recommended that one should drink waters containing at least 30 mg/liter or 30 ppm.

Wednesday, July 18, 2018

Possible link found between diabetes and common white pigment

In a pilot study by a team of researchers at The University of Texas at Austin, crystalline particles of titanium dioxide—the most common white pigment in everyday products ranging from paint to candies—were found in pancreas specimens with Type 2 diabetes, suggesting that exposure to the white pigment is associated with the disease.

Titanium dioxide (TiO2) is not a known constituent of any normal human tissue. Our body normally has plenty of salts and compounds of metallic elements such as sodium, potassium, calcium, iron and magnesium, as well as lesser amounts of other metallic elements like cobalt or molybdenum but not of titanium.

The team examined 11 pancreas specimens, eight of which were from donors who had Type 2 diabetes (T2D) and three from donors who did not. Whereas the three non-diabetic pancreatic tissue specimens contained no detectable TiO2 crystals, the crystals were detected in all of the eight T2D pancreatic tissue specimens. The UT Austin researchers found more than 200 million TiO2 crystallites per gram of TiO2 particles in the specimens from T2D donors but not in the three specimens from non-diabetic donors. They published their findings last month in the journal Chemical Research in Toxicology.

The UT study was led by Adam Heller, professor in the McKetta Department of Chemical Engineering in the Cockrell School of Engineering, a 2007 recipient of the National Medal of Technology and Innovation and a lifelong champion for diabetes research. Heller was a leading member of the teams that designed FreeStyle, the first painless blood-glucose-monitoring system used by millions of people with diabetes worldwide; and the glucose-sensing technology of the FreeStyle Libre system, developed by Abbott Diabetes Care.

"Our initial findings raise the possibility that Type 2 diabetes could be a chronic crystal-associated inflammatory disease of the pancreas, similar to chronic crystal-caused inflammatory diseases of the lung such as silicosis and asbestosis," Heller said.

In the mid-20th century, titanium dioxide pigment replaced highly toxic lead-based pigments. It became the most commonly used white pigment in paints and in foods, medications, toothpaste, cosmetics, plastics and paper. As a result, annual production of titanium dioxide has increased by 4 million tons since the 1960s.

According to the World Health Organization, the number of people with diabetes has quadrupled during the past four decades, affecting approximately 425 million people, with T2D comprising the majority of recorded cases. Although obesity and an aging population are still considered major factors leading to a rise in T2D cases worldwide, Heller's study suggests that increased use of titanium dioxide may also be linked to the rapid rise in the number of people suffering from the disease.

"The increased use of titanium dioxide over the last five decades could be a factor in the Type 2 diabetes epidemic," Heller said. "The dominant T2D-associated pancreatic particles consist of TiO2 crystals, which are used as a colorant in foods, medications and indoor wall paint, and they are transported to the pancreas in the bloodstream. The study raises the possibility that humanity's increasing use of TiO2 pigment accounts for part of the global increase in the incidence of T2D."

Given the wide-reaching implications of his findings, Heller is keen to repeat the study, but this time using a larger sample. "We have already begun a broader study," he said. "Our work isn't over yet

Friday, July 6, 2018

A Report by Special Counsel for a United States Senate Investigating Committee ...Making a Fact Finding Study of a Conspiracy against the Health of the American people.

THE UNDERSIGNED, as Special Counsel to the Senate Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, was directed to supervise a study of the following:

1. All those individuals, organizations, foundations, hospitals and clinics, throughout the United States, which have aneffect upon interstate commerce and which have been conducting researches, investigations, experiments and demonstrationsrelating to the cause, prevention, and methods of diagnosis andtreatment of the disease cancer, to determine the interstate ramifications of their operations, their financial structures, includingtheir fund-raising methods, and the amounts expended for clinical research as distinguished from administrative expenditures,and to ascertain the extent of the therapeutic value claimed by each in the use of its particular therapy.

2. The facts involving the discovery of, the imports froma foreign country of, the researches upon, and the interstate experiments, demonstrations, and use of the various drugs, preparations, and remedies for the treatment of the disease cancer,such drugs to include the so-called wonder drug Krebiozen,Glyoxylide, Mucorhicin and others.

3. The facts involving the interstate conspiracy, if any,engaged in by any individuals, organizations, corporations, associations, and combines of any kind whatsoever, to hinder, suppress, or restrict the free flow or transmission of Krebiozen,Glyoxylide, and Mucorhicin, and other drugs, preparations andremedies, and information, researches, investigations, experiments and demonstrations relating to the cause, prevention andmethods of diagnosis and treatment of the disease cancer.

4. The facts involving the operations of voluntary cooperative prepaid medical plans and the organizations sponsoringsaid plans which are engaged in interstate commerce and whichinclude in their programs medical treatment for the disease cancer, to determine the extent of their interstate insurance operations, the identity of their originators and sponsors, and theresistance, if any, that each insurer has experienced from anyindividuals, organizations, corporations, associations, or combines, in their attempts to offer protection to those who are afflicted with the disease cancer.

5. The facts involving the inequality of opportunity, ifany, that exists with regard to race, creed or color, in connection with the admission of students, researchers, and patientsto institutions throughout the United States engaged in cancertherapy

Activity Report

Pursuant to the above, the undersigned commenced a collection and study of material covering the operations of foundations, hospitals, clinics, and government sponsored organizations specializing in cancer problems, including the following:

Thereafter, the undersigned travelled to Illinois to investigate the so-called Krebiozen controversy, and on July 2, 1953, wrote a report on his findings which is attached hereto and marked "Exhibit A." Included in this report was the evaluation:

"The controversy is involved and requires further research and development. There is reason to believe that the AMA has been hasty, capricious, arbitrary, and outright dishonest, and of course if the doctrine of 'respondeat superior' is to be observed, the alleged machinations of Dr. J. J. Moore (for the past ten years the treasurer of the AMA) could involve the AMA and others in an interstate conspiracy of alarming proportions.

Thereafter, the undersigned visited other areas, interrogating medical men, and on July 14, 1953, wrote a further report. Included in this was the evaluation:

"Being vitally interested and having tried to listen and observe closely, it is my profound conviction that this substance Krebiozen is one of the most promising materials yet isolated for the management of cancer. It is biologically active. I have gone over the records of 530 cases, most of them conducted at a distance from Chicago, by unbiased cancer experts and clinics. In reaching my conclusions I have of course discounted my own lay observations and relied mostly on the opinions of qualified cancer research workers and ordinary experienced physicians.

"I have concluded that in the value of present cancer research, this substance and the theory behind it deserves the most full and complete and scientific study. Its value in the management of the cancer patient has been demonstrated in a sufficient number and percentage of cases to demand further work.

"Behind and over all this is the weirdest conglomeration of corrupt motives, intrigue, selfishness, jealousy, obstruction and conspiracy that I have ever seen.

"Dr. Andrew C. Ivy, who has been conducting research upon this drug, is absolutely honest intellectually, scientifically, and in every other way. Moreover, he appears to be one of the most competent and unbiased cancer experts that I have ever come in contact with, having served on the board of the American Cancer Society and the American Medical Association and in that capacity having been called upon to evaluate various types of cancer therapy. Dr. George G. Stoddard, President of the University of Illinois, in assisting in the cessation of Dr. Ivy's research on cancer at the University of Illinois, and in recommending the abolishment of the latter's post as Vice President of that institution, has in my opinion shown attributes of intolerance for scientific research in general."

It is a matter of common knowledge that the entire subject matter is highly controversial and thus further and additional research and development would entail more time. A controversy among renowned Surgeons, Pathologists, Cancerologists and Radiologists should not deter or silence this Committee from carrying out the mandate contemplated and expressly directed by the late Chairman of your Committee, Senator Charles W. Tobey, by virtue of the resolution passed by the Senate.

Now, passing on to another institution, I have very carefully studied the court records of three cases tried in the Federal and State Courts of Dallas, Texas. A running fight has been going on between officials, especially Dr. Morris Fishbein of the American Medical Association through the Journal of that organization, and the Hoxsey Cancer Clinic. Dr. Fishbein contended that the medicines employed by the Hoxsey Cancer Clinic had no therapeutic value; that it was run by a quack and a charlatan. (This clinic is manned by a staff of over 30 employees, including nurses and physicians). Reprints and circulation of several million copies of articles so prepared resulted in litigation. The Government thereafter intervened and sought an injunction to prevent the transmission in interstate commerce of certain medicines. It is interesting to note that in the Trial Court, before Judge Atwell, who had an opportunity to hear the witnesses in two different trials, it was held that the so-called Hoxsey. method of treating cancer was in some respects superior to that of x-ray, radium and surgery and did have therapeutic value. The Circuit Court of Appeals of the 5th Circuit decided otherwise. This decision was handed down during the trial of a libel suit in the District Court of Dallas, Texas, by Hoxsey against Morris Fishbein, who admitted that he had never practiced medicine one day in his life and had never had a private patient, which resulted in a verdict for Hoxsey and against Morris Fishbein. The defense admitted that Hoxsey could cure external cancer but contended that his medicines for internal cancer had no therapeutic value. The jury, after listening to leading Pathologists, Radiologists, Physicians, Surgeons and scores of witnesses, a great number of whom had never been treated by any Physician or Surgeon except the treatment received at the Hoxsey Cancer Clinic, concluded that Dr. Fishnein was wrong; that his published statements were false, and that the Hoxsey method of treating cancer did have therapeutic value.

In this litigation the Government of the United States, as well as Dr. Fishbein, brought to the Court the leading medical scientists, including Pathologists and others skilled in the treatment of cancer. They came from all parts of the country. It is significant to note that a great number of these doctors admitted that x-ray therapy could cause cancer. This view is supported by medical publications, including the magazine entitled "CANCER" published by the American Cancer Society. May issue of 1948.

I am herewith includingthe names and addresses of some of the witnesses who testified in the State and Federal Court. It has been determined by pathology, in a great many instances by laboratories wholly disconnected from the Hoxsey Cancer Clinic, that they were suffering from different types of cancel, both internal and external, and following treatment they testified they were cured.

I have had access to literature by leading scientists in the field of medicine. The attention of the Committee is invited to the hearings held during the 79th Congress, in July 1946; Senate Bill 1875 being under consideration, wherewith it appears, as follows:

"Dr. George Miley was born in Chicago, 1907, graduated from Chicago Latin School, 1923, graduated with B.A. from Yale University in 1927, from Northwestern Medical School,1932, interned at Chicago Memorial Hospital in 1932 and1933, University of Vienna Postgraduate Medical School, 1933,1934, following which he visited the hospitals in India,China and Japan. He is a fellow of the American Associationfor the Advancement of Science. He holds a national boardcertificate and since 1945 he has been medical director of theGotham Hospital, New York.

"Report of Dr. Miley of a survey made by Dr. Stanley Reimann (in charge of Tumor Research and Pathology, Gotham Hospital) before Senator Pepper's Committee on Senate Bill 1875, a bill to authorize expenditure of one hundred million dollars in cancer research.

"Dr. Reimann's report on cancer cases in Pennsylvania over a long period of time showed that those who received no treatment lived a longer period than those that received surgery, radium or x-ray. The exceptions were those patients who had received electro-surgery. The survey also showed that following the use of radium and x-ray much more harm than good was done to the average cancer patient."

"Dr. William Seaman Bainbridge, A.M., Sc.D., M.D., CM., F.I.C.S. (Hon.) was the recipient of six honorary degrees from various institutions, the most recent being the degree of Doctor Honoris Cause from the University of San Marcos, Peru. He has been surgeon at the New York Skin and Cancer Hos­pital, Surgical Director of New York City Children's Hospital and of Manhattan State Hospital, Ward's Island, and consulting surgeon and gynecologist to various hospitals in the New York metropolitan and suburban areas.

"While there are some who still believe in the efficacy of radiation as a cure, my skepticism with regard to its value is being increasingly substantiated. But even with the best technicof today, its curative effect in real cancer is questionable. In 1939 the great British physiologist, Sir Leonard Hill, wrote: 'Large doses (of gamma and hard x-ray) produced destruction of normal tissues such as marrow and lymphoid tissue, leucocytes and epithelial linings, and death ensues ... The nation would, I think, be little the worse off if all the radium in the country now buried for security from bombing in deep holes, remains therein.'

"A neoplasm should never be incised for diagnostic purposes, for one cannot tell at what split moment the cancer cells may be disseminated and the patient doomed. Aspirating the neoplasm to draw out the cells by suction. This, too, is a very questionable procedure, for what of the cancer cells that may be present below the puncture point and around the needle which have been set free? It must be realized that while cancer cannot be transplanted from man to man, it can be transplanted in the same host." (See index)

"There is a report from another source in which Doctor Feinblatt, for six years Pathologist of the Memorial Hospital, New York, reported that the Memorial Hospital had originally given x-ray and radium treatment before and after radical operations for breast maligancy. These patients did not long survive, so x-ray and radium were given after surgery only. These patients lived a brief time only and after omitting all radiation, patients lived the longest of all." (See index)

Doctors Warned To Be Wary In Use Of X-Rays In Disease Treatment, by Howard W. Blakeslee, Associated Press Science Editor.

"New York, July 6, 1948 — X-rays and gamma rays can cause bone cancer is warning issued in 'Cancer,' a new medical journal started by the American Cancer Society. The bone cancer warning, covering more than twenty pages, is by Doctors William G Cahan. Helen Q. Woodward, Norman L. Higgin-botham. Fred W. Steward and Bradlev I. Coley, all of New York City.

"One of the most dangerous things about this kind of bone cancer, the report states, is the very long delay between the use of the rays and the appearance of the cancers. The delay time in the eleven cases ranged from six to twenty-two years."

"Doctor Herman Joseph Muller, Nobel Prize Winner, a world renowned scientist, has stated the Medical Profession is permanently damaging the American life stream through the unwise use of x-rays. There is no dosage of x-ray so low as to be without risk of producing harmful mutations." (See index)

The attention of the Committee is invited to the request made by Senator Elmer Thomas following an investigation made by the Senator of the Hoxsey Cancer Clinic under date of February 25th, 1947, and addressed to the Surgeon General, Public Health Department, Washington, D.C., wherein he sought to enlist the support of the Federal Government to make an investigation and report. No such investigation was made. In fact, every effort was made to avoid and evade the investigation by the Surgeon General's office. The record will reveal that this clinic did furnish 62 complete case histories, including pathology, names of hospitals, physicians, etc., in 1945. Again in June, 1950, 77 case histories, which included the names of the patients, pathological reports in many instances, and in the absence thereof, the names of the Pathologists, hospitals and physicians who had treated these patients before being treated at the Hoxsey Cancer Clinic. The Council of National Cancer Institute, without investigation, in October 1950, refused to order an investigation. The record in the Federal Court discloses that this agency of the Federal Government took sides and sought in every way to hinder, suppress and restrict this institution in their treatment of cancer. (See testimony Dr. Gilcin Meadors, Pages 1125-1139 Transcript of Records, Case No. 13645, U.S.C.A.)

Among the numerous foundations and clinics which profess to possess a remedy for the treatment of cancer is the Lincoln Foundation of Medford, Massachusetts, which has been the particular target of the AMA. I have not had an opportunity to sufficiently explore the particular type of therapy employed by this institution. However, I understand it involves a unique theory of inhalent therapy and the transmission of bacteria-phage. In passing it is important to note that this technique was the subject of particular interest to the late Chairman who was a trustee of the Lincoln Foundation following a successful treatment of his son Charles W. Tobey, Jr. This remedy has been tried by hundreds of patients and it is alleged that these treatments have been proven beneficial.

Another institution which claims to have made some progress in the treatment of cancer is the Drosnes-Lazenbey Cancer Clinic of Pittsburgh, Pa. The reports would indicate that this institution is likewise entitled to a hearing before this Committee. The heavy toll of life being taken by cancer requires a searching investigation. The methods employed, as I understand it, is a substance known as Mucorhicin, which is reported to be of therapeutic value.

Under the fourth assignment concerning voluntary cooperative prepaid medical plans and any resistance encountered from organizations, associations or combines, it is a matter of public record in the Federal and State Court that medical associations have put up a road block whenever or wherever this is attempted.

The Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, through its Sub-Committee on Health, submitted the results of a study of health insurance plans in the United States, in a report issued in May 1951, 82nd Congress. This was accomplished under the direction of Dr. Dean H. Clark, now the Director of the Massachusetts General Hospital. This appears to be the first objective and impartial study of the scope, benefits and effectiveness of voluntary health insurance plans. It shows that one-half of the population at that time had some form of protection against the cost of hospital care, but three million had what can be called comprehensive protection against the cost of hospital and medical care. Specifically with reference to cancer, it would appear that an opportunity would be afforded members of this sort of a health program to periodic checkups to determine whether they had cancer. This subject was discussed at length between Kenneth Meiklejohn, Staff Director of the Sub-Committee on Health, and Senator Tobey two years ago. Correspondence between the two is available. The reports, of course, are available to the members of this Committee.

From a strictly legal as well as ethical approach, if one individual has the right to select his own physician or hospital, why cannot 10,000 individuals and their families determine that they intend to invest directly, or indirectly, in the construction and maintenance of a hospital, employ a staff of competent physicians, surgeons, technicians, laboratory experts, nurses, interns, et cetera, to look after their health problems? This is not so-called socialized medicine. It is purely voluntary. Here, as elsewhere stated in this report, the jurisdiction of the Committee may be limited. It may properly belong to the States and their legislators and courts to determine this problem. However, the general welfare clause of the Constitution may be the answer. If the Committee should determine that it has jurisdiction, I am of the opinion that competent legal evidence can be presented which will aid and assist the Committee in its final judgment.

With reference to the fifth assignment, you are advised that time did not permit me to ascertain the number of students or the increase thereof in the various medical schools through­out the country. It has been suggested that a studied effort has been made by certain groups to keep the number of students enrolling in medical schools at a low figure. I do not assert this to be the fact and I doubt if the Committee would have jurisdiction to go into that question. This would properly belong tothe States. If this is a fact, then the various State legislatures of the country should, of course, take necessary steps, consistent with the public welfare, to see that every opportunity is given to any boy or girl who possesses the necessary qualifications to be permitted to enter medical schools. If, on the other hand, this Committee believes that it has jurisdiction under the Gen­eral Welfare Clause of the Constitution to go forward, then certainly it would be a proper and timely matter of inquiry. In any event, you do have jurisdiction and should complete the in­vestigation in so far as cancer is concerned by those engaged in the research field.

A careful study of the subject matter embraced in the di­rection of the late Chairman will disclose the tremendous importance of the investigation undertaken and the consideration of the results by the members of this Committee.

We have long since passed the age of witch hunting. We are, notwithstanding, living in an era of hysteria. Investigation seems to be the order of the day. Crude thinking results in hysterical action. Perhaps the converse is true. The beginning of hysteria is the end of sound thinking. Proceeding, therefore, to the end result sought by all, we recognize the value of our goal in striving for a sound, vigorous and healthful Nation at minimum costs. Money, however, lavishly spent to stamp out a dreadful scourge is sound public economy.

I have approached this problem with an open mind. Recognizing the importance of men skilled in the science of medicine, who are best informed, it not qualified, on the question of cancer, its causes and treatment, I directed my attention to the propaganda by the American Medical Association and the American Cancer Society to the effect: namely, "that radium, x-ray therapy and surgery are the only recognized treatments for cancer."

Is there any dispute among recognized medical scientists in America and elsewhere in the world on the use of radium and x-ray therapy in the treatment of cancer. The answer is definitely Yes; there is a division of opinion on the use of radium and x-ray. Both agencies are destructive, not constructive. In the alleged destruction of the abnormal, outlaw or cancer cells both x-ray therapy and radium destroy normal tissue and normal cells. Recognized medical authorities in America and elsewhere state positively that x-ray therapy can cause cancer in and of itself. Documented cases are available.

The increased number of cancer patients in America of all ages and the apparent failure to presently cope with this dread disease indicates the necessity of a sustained effort of private and Federal agencies to continue research in the field of cancer; its causes and treatment.

If radium, x-ray or surgery or either of them is the complete answer, then the greatest hoax of the age is being perpetrated upon the people by the continued appeal for funds for further research. If neither x-ray, radium or- surgery is the complete answer to this dreaded disease, and I submit that it is not, then what is the plain duty of society? Should we stand still? Should we sit idly by and count the number of physicians, surgeons and cancerologists who are not only divided but who, because of fear or favor, are forced to line up with the so-called accepted view of the American Medical Association, or should this Committee make a full scale investigation of the organized effort to hinder, suppress and restrict the free flow of drugs which allegedly have proven successful in cases where clinical records, case history, pathological reports and x-ray photograph­ic proof, together with the alleged cured patients, are available.

Accordingly, we should determine whether exisiting agencies, both public and private, are engaged and have pursued a policy of harassment, ridicule, slander and libelous attacks on others sincerely engaged in stamping out this curse of mankind. Have medical associations, through their officers, agents, servants and employees engaged in this practice? My investigation to date should convince this Committee that a conspiracy does exist to stop the free flow and use of drugs in interstate commerce which allegedly has solid therapeutic value. Public and private funds have been thrown around like confetti at a country fair to close up and destroy clinics, hospitals and scientific research laboratories which do not conform to the viewpoint of medical associations.

How long will the American people take this? To illustrate the stranglehold of the American Medical Association on legislation which in turn affects every household in America, let us look at a small 25 cent tube of penicillin ointment. Is it dangerous to have around the house for a cut or small bruise on your body? Rat poison can be bought without a doctor's prescription. The sale of arsenic must have a doctor's prescription. The sale of arsenic and rat poisons is small but not penicillin. Accordingly we must have a doctor's prescription in America to buy a 25 cent tube of ointment. In Canada, however, the MedicalAssociation has not yet discovered THE GREAT DANGER of a small tube of penicillin ointment and, accordingly the people are able to buy it without paying a doctor for a prescription. To say that it is dangerous, is silly. To assert, rather, that it is but another manifestation of power and privilege of a few at the expense of the many would be more consistent with truth and wholly accurate.

What is the duty of this Committee and the members thereof? Your first duty, of course, is to do right. Properly considered, that is your only duty. In doing right, however, you owe a duty to the American people. In upholding the law and enacting legislation for the people of America, we look first to the instrument of our creation as a representative form of Government. Those powers not specifically conferred upon the Federal Government and denied to the States, are reserved either to the States or to the people. Thus the founding fathers very wisely created an area of freedom in which free men shall function. It is in this area set aside by the fathers of our Republic that people have the right to own property, transact business, build up a system of free enterprise without hindrance, harass­ment or abuse of either the Government, State or Federal, or of other citizens, however powerful, so long as the people so engaged do not trespass upon the rights of others. This is the basic concept of liberty functioning in America. It may be said to be a reservoir of freedom. In this area we have mingled our money and blood with the races of mankind. We have demonstrated our ability to live together peacefully and happily, although we represent most of the races, most of the colors and most of the creeds. This was an innovation and a new experiment to the peoples of the old world. Out of and from this area has. sprung the noblest dreams and saintliest purposes of mankind, purposes so strong and vital that it has become the envy and admiration of a waiting world. People look longingly to the shores of America and desire to make this their asylum of escape and hope for the future. It is more than a dream. It is a reality. While we have not solved all the problems of mankind, we have at least provided a sanctuary and the instruments of government, if properly guarded against the abuse of selfish men and organiza­tions who would bend it to suit their purposes, which could live for centuries to come. In this connexion this Committee should investigate the advertising agency which controls all advertis­ing in the Journal of the American Medical Association as well as the various State Journals. Why is the stamp of approval, by the so-called nutrition expert and their Council on Foods, placed on certain foodstuffs, denied to others, and others condemned, without a reasonable investigation? Is there any relationship between approval by these experts and the operation of the advertising agency in the offices of the American Medical Association?

May I, with propriety, call your attention to the tragedy which has invaded the United States Senate. Four great Americans, all of them, Senator McMahon, Senator Wherry, Senator Vandenberg and Senator Bob Taft were all stricken down with this dreaded disease. We are under a compelling moral obligation to the memory of these great public servants and to the untold millions of cancer sufferers throughout the world to carry on this investigation. We cannot do otherwise.

Wednesday, July 4, 2018

How Much Money Do Pediatricians Really Make From Vaccines?

If you want to be sure your pediatrician has your child’s best interest, this is mandatory reading. Pediatricians around the country have begun refusing to accept families who opt out of some or all vaccines. Thanks to a tip sent to Wellness & Equalityby a reader, now we know why.

When my friend’s child suffered a life-threatening reaction to a vaccine a week after her first birthday, my friend assumed her pediatrician would write her a medical exemption from future vaccines. Shortly after receiving a routine set of vaccines, the happy, vibrant one-year-old spiked a 106 degree fever, began having seizures, and was hospitalized. When the unexplained “illness” passed after a week in the hospital, the little girl had lost her ability to walk. My friend describes how her daughter, who had learned to walk several months earlier at 9 months, suddenly “stumbled around like a drunk person” for weeks following the vaccines. My friend met with a team of pediatricians, neurologists, and naturopathic doctors, and they agreed: Her daughter had suffered a brain injury caused by a reaction to one of the vaccines. Hoping the injury would be temporary and that she might recover and ease her brain inflammation if they could help her small body quickly eliminate the vaccine additives that caused the reaction, my friend’s daughter underwent an intensive detoxification program overseen by a nutritionalist. Slowly, her daughter relearned to walk.

My friend is a practicing attorney who graduated from a Top 10 college. The evidence was overwhelming that her daughter’s reaction had been caused by vaccines, she told me.

But a few months later, when she took her daughter back into the pediatrician for a visit, he wanted to vaccinate her daughter again. She was baffled. Why?

After a reader sent us a link to a PDF file of Blue Cross Blue Shield’s Physician Incentive Program available online, Wellness & Equality learned that insurance companies pay pediatricians massive bonuses based on the percentage of children who are fully vaccinated by age 2.

So how much money do doctors really make from vaccines? The average American pediatrician has 1546 patients, though some pediatricians see many more. The vast majority of those patients are very young, perhaps because children transition to a family physician or stop visiting the doctor at all as they grow up. As they table above explains, Blue Cross Blue Shield pays pediatricians $400 per fully vaccinated child. If your pediatrician has just 100 fully-vaccinated patients turning 2 this year, that’s $40,000. Yes, Blue Cross Blue Shield pays your doctor a $40,000 bonus for fully vaccinating 100 patients under the age of 2. If your doctor manages to fully vaccinate 200 patients, that bonus jumps to $80,000.

But here’s the catch: Under Blue Cross Blue Shield’s rules, pediatricians lose the whole bonus unless at least 63% of patients are fully vaccinated, and that includes the flu vaccine. So it’s not just $400 on your child’s head–it could be the whole bonus. To your doctor, your decision to vaccinate your child might be worth $40,000, or much more, depending on the size of his or her practice.

If your pediatrician recommends that your child under the age of 2 receive the flu vaccine–even though the flu vaccine has neverbeen studied in very young children and evidence suggests that the flu vaccine actually weakens a person’s immune system over the long term–ask yourself: Is my doctor more concerned with selling me vaccines to keep my child healthy or to send his child to private school?

Update 4/30/2017: After Wellness & Equality published this article, Blue Cross Blue Shield locked online access to their incentive program and then removed the page altogether. Clearly this incentive program was never intended to be public knowledge and created a bit of PR issue for them. Fortunately, another website managed to save the entire BCBS incentive program booklet and has published it in entirety online… You can read it here: Blue Cross Blue Shield Physician Incentive Program

About Me

Grew up in a rural area, farming and logging and construction filled my life with many skills. Yet my heart as always followed a simpler life. It has been for the love of nature and all it entails that has led me to happier place full of adventures, great and small, trying never to miss the opportunity to help each and everyone.